- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2069 WP No. 14837 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 14837 OF 2018 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. MR. S. SHIVAKUMAR S/O M. SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDING AT KONRAD ADENAUER STR 38B, 63303, DREIECH THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY MR. M. SHAMANNA S/O LATE MUTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS RESIDING AT SRINANDINI 3RD MAIN, III PHASE, J.P NAGAR BANALORE-560 078 [DELETED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 24.05.2022] 2. MRS. SHANKUNTALA W/O MR. M. SHAMMANA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS RESIDING AT SRINANDINI 3RD MAIN, III PHASE, J.P NAGAR BANGALORE-560 078 3. MR. S. RAVIKUMAR S/O MR. M. SHAMMANA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDING AT SRINANDINI 3RD MAIN, III PHASE, J.P NAGAR BANGALORE-560 078 Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2069 WP No. 14837 of 2018 4. MR. ROSHAN S/O MR. SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS RESIDING AT KONRAD ADENAUER STR 38B, 63303, DREIECH THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY 5. 6. MR. LIKITH RAVIKUMAR S/O MR. S. RAVIKUMAR AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS RESIDING AT SRINANDINI 3RD MAIN, III PHASE, J.P NAGAR BANGALORE-560 078 MR. S. SURESH S/O M. SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT KONRAD ADENAUER STR 38B, 63225, LANGEN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY ALL REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER M/S AXIS CONCEPTS CAPSTONE PRIVATE LIMITED, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT ESTRELLA TERRACES HULIMAVU, BANNERGHATTA ROAD OPPOSITE HDFC BANK BANGALORE-560 076 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR. HARISH BABU S/O LATE MR.RAMA RAJU AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. KASHYAP N. NAIK, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2069 WP No. 14837 of 2018 AND: 1. COMMISSIONER, BBMP HAVING ITS OFFICE AT CORPORATION CIRCLE N.R.SQUARE BANGALORE-560 002 2. 3. JOINT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING (BANGALORE SOUTH), BBMP HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NEW ANNEXURE BUILDING 4TH FLOOR, N.R.SQUARE BANGALORE-560 002 THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD BANGALORE-560 020 &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SATYANAND B.S, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. B.S. SACHIN, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ISSUE THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS BY GIVING THEM TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENTAL RIGHTS (TDR) OVER THE PETITIOENR'S PROPERTY BY COMPLYING WITH THE GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION DTD 03.08.2009 VIDE ANNX-A AND THE TERMS OF THE RELINQUISHMENT DEED DTD 20.06.2015 VIDE ANNX-B. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2069 WP No. 14837 of 2018 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioners are before this court are seeking for the following reliefs: (i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to issue the Development Right Certificate in favour of the Petitioners by giving them Transfer of Developmental Rights (TDR) over the Petitioner's property by complying with the Government Notification dated 03.08.2009, bearing No.EE/MR(S-E)/PR/04/09-10 (Annexure-A), and the terms of the Relinquishment Deed dated 20.06.2015 (Annexure-B); and (ii) Grant such other relief/s in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that, despite a portion of the land belonging to them having been relinquished for the formation of the road, the Development Right Certificate (DRC) for Transfer of Development Right (TDR), has not been issued to the petitioners in terms of the Notification dated 03.08.2009 (Annexure-A) and the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2069 WP No. 14837 of 2018 relinquishment deed dated 20.06.2015 (Annexure-B). Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, in this regard, petitioner has made a representation dated 23.12.2016 as per Annexure-F to the Writ Petition. 3. Learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 would however submit that, since additional FAR has been made available to the petitioners as regard to building which was a building constructed on land which has been acquired, there would be no requirement for issuance of TDR. Even if that be so, it was for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to have passed an order on the application filed by the petitioner, giving reasons for the refusal, if any. The respondents could not have sat on the said application without passing any order. In that view of the matter, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to consider the application of the petitioner for grant of Transfer of Development Rights in terms of the Notification - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2069 WP No. 14837 of 2018 (Annexure-A) issued by the BBMP, bearing No.EE/MR(S- E)/PR/04/09-10, dated 03.08.2009, within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8